‘Significant legal breakthrough' as NSW court blocks state's largest coal expansion over emissions
The decision is a significant blow for MACH Energy's Mount Pleasant coalmine expansion in Muswellbrook in the upper Hunter and one that climate advocates say could have wider implications for future fossil fuel project proposals in NSW.
The court found the independent planning commission was required and failed to consider the impacts of all emissions associated with the project on the local environment, including from the exported emissions – known as scope 3 emissions – when the coal is sold and burnt overseas.
The commission approved the Mount Pleasant mine expansion in 2022. The project would double the mine's coal output to 21m tonnes per annum until 2048 and 98% of the projected emissions are scope 3 emissions.
The Denman Aberdeen Muswellbrook Scone Healthy Environment Group (DAMS HEG) unsuccessfully appealed against the decision in the land and environment court last year but the court of appeal found in the group's favour on Thursday morning.
Wendy Wales, the group's president, welcomed the decision and said the burning of fossil fuels was causing increasingly destructive weather events globally, including in NSW.
'Our communities are enduring increasingly terrifying climate disasters, and nature is disappearing before our very eyes. Yet our governments are continuing to throw fuel on the fire by approving massive new coal projects like MACH Energy's Mount Pleasant,' she said.
Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton's Clear Air column as a free newsletter
'It shouldn't be up to a small community group like DAMS HEG to fight this global battle, but in the absence of meaningful government action to protect us from climate harm arising from coalmines, we felt we had no choice but to stand up for our children and grandchildren, the public interest, the rule of law and nature itself,' she said.
The matter will now return to the land and environment court to consider whether conditions can be imposed that would validate the approval or whether the project must return to the planning commission.
DAMS HEG was represented in the appeal by Johnson Legal and counsel team Naomi Sharp SC and Matthias Thompson.
Elaine Johnson, the director of Johnson Legal, said the court had determined that it was the planning commission's job to consider the link between fossil fuel expansions and climate harm felt by local communities in NSW.
'Today's decision has broad-ranging implications for all new and expanded fossil fuel projects in NSW. No longer can the NSW government say that climate impacts felt by local communities in NSW are divorced from the continued production of coal and gas in the state,' she said.
Sign up to Clear Air Australia
Adam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisis
after newsletter promotion
'It's difficult to see how further fossil fuel expansions will pass muster following today's decision.'
Johnson said the judgment built on the landmark 2019 Rocky Hill finding by the land and environment court, which cited climate change in its reasons for upholding a planning commission decision to reject Gloucester Resources' proposed Rocky Hill coalmine in the Hunter Valley.
The NSW Greens spokesperson for planning and the environment, Sue Higginson, said the case was 'a significant legal breakthrough and will send shockwaves through a planning system and a government that has been failing to take real action to prevent climate breakdown'.
'The court has ruled that the government bears responsibility for the emissions that they create as a result of the fossil fuel projects they approve,' she said.
'This is a giant leap forward in holding our governments to account when it comes to the damage they are doing to our climate and local communities through waving through more coal and gas projects.'
The planning commission said it respected the decision of the court of appeal.
Guardian Australia has sought comment from MACH Energy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
6 hours ago
- The Guardian
Australia is suddenly flush with forest-friendly recycled toilet paper firms: what's the state of ply?
The Australian brand Who Gives a Crap (WGAC) has recently launched its toilet paper products in the UK supermarket chain Tesco. Having begun as a home delivery service, its recycled and 'sustainable' products are now stocked in Woolworths, Aldi and independent supermarkets such as IGA in Australia. Despite the growing presence of WGAC and other brands offering recycled products, the supermarket shelves remain dominated by plush, virgin-pulp toilet paper. So what are the prospects for further changes in the market? And what are the ethical and environmental options for consumers? Most mainstream toilet paper is made from virgin pulp – wood fibre sourced from hardwood tree plantations. 'They're grown for single-use products, without any environmental benefit,' says Jennifer Macklin, a senior research fellow at Monash University's Sustainable Development Institute. 'Recycled paper uses less energy and water to produce than virgin or bamboo products,' Macklin says. The head of sustainability at WGAC, Elissa Foster, says globally more than 1m trees are cut down each day to produce traditional toilet paper, citing 2022 research from Edge Environment, commissioned by the organisation. Sign up: AU Breaking News email Planting trees for low-value products such as toilet paper in place of old-growth forests contributes to the loss of habitat for species such as the yellow-tailed black-cockatoo, says Estelle Van Hoeydonck, a conservation campaigner at Zoos Victoria, which runs the Wipe for Wildlife campaign. 'Opting for recycled toilet paper is one tangible action Australians can take to support wildlife,' she says. Recycled toilet paper is made from post-consumer waste paper, diverting material from landfill, reducing demand for virgin pulp and supporting a circular economy, Foster says. Encore Tissue, an Australian company that produces the icare brand, was featured on Dr Karl's How Things Work earlier this year. It estimates its recycling operations save 138,000 trees, 185 gigawatt hours of electricity and 128,000 litres of water a year. But Macklin says it is just one part of the wider picture. 'Recycled toilet paper is a positive option when feasible – but we don't want people to feel guilty. Choices like reducing food waste have far greater environmental value than switching toilet paper brands.' Bamboo is often marketed as an eco-friendly alternative – including by WGAC – because it grows rapidly, reaching maturity in three to five years compared with 10 to 40 years for other trees commonly harvested, Foster says. She says it is 'a great alternative to wood-based paper', but agrees with independent experts that recycled paper is the more sustainable option. 'Bamboo is a substitution strategy,' Macklin says, 'less preferable than reusing existing materials.' Nevertheless, Macklin says she chooses bamboo for my household. 'After testing several options, that was the compromise that worked for us.' One reason is that recycled toilet paper is still not as soft as virgin or bamboo. It may also disintegrate less effectively, affecting plumbing. The consumer advocacy group Choice warned in its 2025 toilet paper review that some recycled brands did not break down quickly enough. Yes – for both online and in-store brands. WGAC reported a 21% year-on-year growth in Woolworths over the past 12 months, with rising interest beyond early adopters. The icare products, which are sold exclusively through supermarkets, have also consistently increased sales over the past few years. Experts agree that the more consumers embrace recycled options, the more likely it is supermarkets will expand their ranges. But availability is still patchy. Woolworths carries several recycled brands, including from WGAC, icare, Naturale and Emotions (online only). Coles lists just one icare product. Aldi does not stock recycled toilet paper year-round but has sold limited editions of WGAC products. Foster says WGAC has helped raise awareness and meet demand for recycled toilet paper in a more convenient way. 'We witnessed this demand rise in 2020 due to #toiletpapergate [the panic buying spree when Covid hit].' An icare spokesperson said WGAC's rise had not negatively affected its shelf presence. 'We try to match pack sizes, quality and prices with non-sustainable brands like Quilton or Kleenex.' Other home-delivery startups like Yarn'n, Oo Bamboo, About a Dog and Emotions, have followed similar models, often linking each purchase to a 50% charitable donation.
The Sun
6 hours ago
- The Sun
Major UK high street bank quits UN-backed net zero alliance as it says body ‘not fit for purpose'
A MAJOR high street bank has become the latest British lender to quit the Net Zero Banking Alliance, the bank said on Friday. Barclays argued that the departure of several global lenders has left it no longer fit to support the bank's green transition. Barclays' decision to quit the foremost banking alliance focused on tackling climate change follows on from HSBC and several major US banks. It also raises questions about the ability of the group to influence change in the sector going forward. The bank said in a statement on its website: "After consideration, we have decided to withdraw from the Net Zero Banking Alliance." It added that its commitment to be net zero by 2050 remained unchanged and that it still saw a commercial opportunity for itself and its clients in the energy transition. Earlier this week Barclays published the first update on its sustainability strategy in several years. It said the bank made £500 million in revenue from sustainable and low-carbon transition finance in 2024. Jeanne Martin, co-director of corporate engagement at responsible investment NGO ShareAction called the decision to leave the Net Zero Banking Alliance "incredibly disappointing and a step in the wrong direction at a time when the dangers of climate change are rapidly mounting." Barclays said the alliance was no longer fit for its purpose: "With the departure of most of the global banks, the organisation no longer has the membership to support our transition." The Net Zero Banking Alliance, a global initiative launched by the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative, lists more than 100 members on its website - including leading international financial institutions. A spokesperson for the alliance said it remains focused on "supporting its members to lead on climate by addressing the barriers preventing their clients from investing in the net-zero transition." It comes after it was announced that Barclays is slashing interest rates on its popular Rainy Day for the third time in less than seven months. From August 4, the interest rate for balances up to £5,000 will fall from 4.61% to 4.36%. The Rainy Day Saver account, which offers easy access to funds, has been a favourite among Barclays ' 20 million customers. It is designed for balances up to £5,000, with savers earning the higher rate on the first £5,000 – currently 4.61%. Savings above this threshold earn just 1% interest, but customers benefit from instant access to their money at any time. At the current rate, holding £5,000 in the account would earn you £230.50 in interest over 12 months. However, when the rate drops to 4.36%, this will fall to £218 - a loss of £12.50 per year. Once boasting a competitive 5.12% interest rate earlier this year, Barclays has steadily chipped away at its appeal. In February, the rate dropped to 4.87%, followed by another cut in April to 4.61%. In February, the bank reduced the rate to 4.87%, followed by another cut in April to 4.61%. Now, just months later, rates are set to drop again, leaving savers questioning whether to stick with the account or explore better options elsewhere. How Barclay Card Changes Could Affect You ANALYSIS by Consumer Reporter, James Flanders: Barclaycard's change to its credit card repayment structure sounds great if you don't dig into the details. After all, Barclaycard says it's "making the changes to give you greater flexibility each month". In practice, it means that if you can't afford to pay off your balance in full at the end of each statement period, you can repay much less under the minimum repayment option than you have done previously. If you only pay the minimum amounts on occasion, this is super useful. But if you rely on this type of repayment plan in the long term, it could will cost you hundreds of pounds extra in interest. It could also negatively affect your credit file as it'll take you much longer to clear your debt. More interest will be applied to your outstanding balance, too, as less is paid down each month. For example, if you have a balance of £5,000 on a Barclaycard at 24% interest, where you only make the minimum payments and don't spend on the card. Under the old "2.5% of the balance plus the interest charged" rule, it would take around 14 years to clear the balance. In total, you'd expect to pay about £3,500 in interest. But with the new "1% of the balance plus the interest charged" calculation, it will take over 30 years to clear the same balance. You'd then end up paying a whopping £8,500 in interest. Before taking out a new credit card or increasing the amount you borrow, it's vital to consider the consequences. You should only borrow money if you can afford to pay it back. It's always vital to ask yourself if you actually need to borrow before committing to a new credit card, personal loan or overdraft. If you use a credit card, I'd recommend that you always pay off your balance in full at the end of each statement period. Lenders have a responsibility to help customers who are in debt. If you're in a debt crisis, your first point of call should be your lender. They might help you out by offering you a reduced interest rate or a temporary payment holiday - so check in with your lender if you're struggling.
The Guardian
10 hours ago
- The Guardian
Australia shouldn't fear the AI revolution – new skills can create more and better jobs
It seems a lifetime ago, but it was 2017 when the former NBN CEO Mike Quigley and I wrote a book about the impact of technology on our labour market. Changing Jobs: The Fair Go in the New Machine Age was our attempt to make sense of rapid technological change and its implications for Australian workers. It sprang from a thinkers' circle Andrew Charlton and I convened regularly back then, to consider the biggest, most consequential shifts in our economy. Flicking through the book now makes it very clear that the pace of change since then has been breathtaking. The stories of Australian tech companies give a sense of its scale. In 2017, the cloud design pioneer Canva was valued at $US1bn – today, it's more than $US30bn. Leading datacentre company AirTrunk was opening its first two centres in Sydney and Melbourne. It now has almost a dozen across Asia-Pacific and is backed by one of the world's biggest investors. We understand a churning and changing world is a source of opportunity but also anxiety for Australians. While the technology has changed, our goal as leaders remains the same. The responsibility we embrace is to make Australian workers, businesses and investors beneficiaries, not victims, of that change. That matters more than ever in a new world of artificial intelligence. Breakthroughs in 'large language models' (LLMs) – computer programs trained on massive datasets that can understand and respond in human languages – have triggered a booming AI 'hype cycle' and are driving a 'cognitive industrial revolution'. ChatGPT became a household name in a matter of months and has reframed how we think about working, creating and problem-solving. LLMs have been adopted seven times faster than the internet and 20 times faster than electricity. The rapid take-up has driven the biggest rise in the S&P 500 since the late 1990s. According to one US estimate, eight out of 10 workers could use LLMs for at least 10% of their work in future. Yet businesses are still in the discovery phase, trying to separate hype from reality and determine what AI to build, buy or borrow. Artificial intelligence will completely transform our economy. Every aspect of life will be affected. I'm optimistic that AI will be a force for good, but realistic about the risks. The Nobel prize-winning economist Darren Acemoglu estimates that AI could boost productivity by 0.7% over the next decade, but some private sector estimates are up to 30 times higher. Goldman Sachs expects AI could drive gross domestic product (GDP) growth up 7% over the next 10 years, and PwC estimates it could bump up global GDP by $15.7tn by 2030. The wide variation in estimates is partly due to different views on how long it will take to integrate AI into business workflows deeply enough to transform the market size or cost base of industries. But if some of the predictions prove correct, AI may be the most transformative technology in human history. At its best, it will convert energy into analysis, and more productivity into higher living standards. It's expected to have at least two significant economy-wide effects. First, it reduces the cost of information processing. One example of this is how eBay's AI translation tools have removed language barriers to drive international sales. The increase in cross-border trade is the equivalent of having buyers and sellers 26% closer to one another – effectively shrinking the distance between Australia and global markets. This is one reason why the World Trade Organization forecasts AI will lower trade costs and boost trade volumes by up to 13%. Second, cheaper analysis accelerates and increases our problem-solving capacity, which can, in turn, speed up innovation by reducing research and development (R&D) costs and skills bottlenecks. By making more projects stack up commercially, AI is likely to raise investment, boost GDP and generate demand for human expertise. Despite the potential for AI to create more high-skilled, high-wage jobs, some are concerned that adoption will lead to big increases in unemployment. The impact of AI on the labour force is uncertain, but there are good reasons to be optimistic. One study finds that more than half of the use cases of LLMs involve workers iterating back and forth with the technology, augmenting workers' skills in ways that enable them to achieve more. Another recent study found that current LLMs often automate only some tasks within roles, freeing up employees to add more value rather than reducing hours worked. These are some of the reasons many expect the AI transformation to enhance skills and change the nature of work, rather than causing widespread or long-term structural unemployment. Even so, the impact of AI on the nature of work is expected to be substantial. We've seen this play out before – more than half the jobs people do today are in occupations that didn't even exist at the start of the second world war. Some economists have suggested AI could increase occupational polarisation – driving a U-shaped increase in demand for manual roles that are harder to automate and high-skill roles that leverage technology, but a reduction in demand for medium-skilled tasks. But workers in many of these occupations may be able to leverage AI to complete more specialised tasks and take on more productive, higher-paying roles. In this transition, the middle has the most to gain and the most at stake. There is also a risk that AI could increase short-term unemployment if investment in skills does not keep up with the changing nature of work. Governments have an important role to play here, and a big motivation for our record investment in education is ensuring that skills keep pace with technological change. But it's also up to business, unions and the broader community to ensure we continue to build the human capital and skills we need to grasp this opportunity. To be optimistic about AI is not to dismiss the risks, which are not limited to the labour market. The ability of AI to rapidly collate, create and disseminate information and disinformation makes people more vulnerable to fraud and poses a risk to democracies. AI technologies are also drastically reducing the cost of surveillance and increasing its effectiveness, with implications for privacy, autonomy at work and, in some cases, personal security. There are questions of ethics, of inequality, of bias in algorithms, and legal responsibility for decision-making when AI is involved. These new technologies will also put pressure on resources such as energy, land, water and telecoms infrastructure, with implications for carbon emissions. But we are well placed to manage the risks and maximise the opportunities. In 2020, Australia was ranked sixth in the world in terms of AI companies and research institutions when accounting for GDP. Our industrial opportunities are vast and varied – from developing AI software to using AI to unlock value in traditional industries. Markets for AI hardware – particularly chips – and foundational models are quite concentrated. About 70% of the widely used foundational models have been developed in the US, and three US firms claim 65% of the global cloud computing market. But further downstream, markets for AI software and services are dynamic, fragmented and more competitive. The Productivity Commission sees potential to develop areas of comparative advantage in these markets. Infrastructure is an obvious place to start. According to the International Data Corporation, global investment in AI infrastructure increased 97% in the first half of 2024 to $US47bn and is on its way to $US200bn by 2028. We are among the top five global destinations for datacentres and a world leader in quantum computing. Our landmass, renewable energy potential and trusted international partnerships make us an attractive destination for data processing. Our substantial agenda, from the capacity investment scheme to the Future Made in Australia plan, will be key to this. They are good examples of our strategy to engage and invest, not protect and retreat. Our intention is to regulate as much as necessary to protect Australians, but as little as possible to encourage innovation. There is much work already under way: our investment in quantum computing company PsiQuantum and AI adopt centres, development of Australia's first voluntary AI safety standard, putting AI on the critical technologies list, a national capability plan, and work on R&D. Next steps will build on the work of colleagues like the assistant minister for the digital economy, Andrew Charlton, the science minister, Tim Ayres and former science minister Ed Husic, and focus on at least five things: Building confidence in AI to accelerate development and adoption in key sectors. Investing in and encouraging up skilling and reskilling to support our workforce. Helping to attract, streamline, speed up and coordinate investment in data infrastructure that's in the national interest, in ways that are cost effective, sustainable and make the most of our advantages. Promoting fair competition in global markets and building demand and capability locally to secure our influence in AI supply chains. And working with the finance minister, Katy Gallagher, to deliver safer and better public services using AI. Artificial intelligence will be a key concern of the economic reform roundtable I'm convening this month because it has major implications for economic resilience, productivity and budget sustainability. I'm setting these thoughts out now to explain what we'll grapple with and how. AI is contentious, and of course, there is a wide spectrum of views, but we are ambitious and optimistic. We can deploy AI in a way consistent with our values if we treat it as an enabler, not an enemy, by listening to and training workers to adapt and augment their work. Because empowering people to use AI well is not just a matter of decency or a choice between prosperity and fairness; it is the only way to get the best out of people and technology at the same time. It is not beyond us to chart a responsible middle course on AI, which maximises the benefits and manages the risks. Not by letting it rip, and not by turning back the clock and pretending none of this is happening, but by turning algorithms into opportunities for more Australians to be beneficiaries, not victims of a rapid transformation that is gathering pace. Jim Chalmers is the federal treasurer
